Infill Planes

[Bedrock]

Is there a generally agreed definition of what constitutes an "infill plane"?

I have assumed that an infill is one where the blade is supported on a timber infill, as with Norris, Spears and, currently Konrad Sauer, whereas Mr. Holtey's recent designs are supported on a metal cross piece, and not strictly an infill, even if the plane has wooden handle construction, between metal side plates.

 

[D_W]

I wouldn't call them infills. Good luck finding a hard definition, though. In my mind, something like a norris 2 fits the definition - metal shell with a wooden infill inside the plane.

Something like the current brese planes don't (the types where the entire plane is a heavy metal shell with a wooden knob and handle added.

No clue how manufacturers did the rough work on the infills themselves, and no clue how Konrad does it (I'm surprised that he's lasted as long as he has, as that fitting is critical and it's slow work unless you start with two patterned pieces that are very close already).

The rear infill on my coffin spiers looks to be two pieces. One that was fitted flush with the wood, and then another glued and affixed to the top (which would eliminate a lot of the labor).

There have to be some aficionados on this board who would know what the manufacturing looked like in early Norris, but I'm assuming all of the work was gotten close (including the wood) to final work with machine tools, and perhaps curves and shaping of handles done by hand. Metalwork only fine tuned for fit off of the machine tool patterns.

Konrad has had his machining done by others, at least at some point. I recall him making a titanium plane (bad idea! titanium is springy and doesn't work like a free machining alloy) and stating on his blog that he outsourced the machining.

Karl did mostly finish work by hand (and peining), but his operation was otherwise small manufacturing (making patterns and then using a duplication lathe for knobs, etc). Very sensible, and still with the extreme taste and eye to finish with hand work and do it perfectly. Brese got away from dovetails early and went to rivets (as Karl had done) and has now gone to the steel cross-piece, too. It's easier on the maker and I'm sure there are fewer duds or unexpected movement (fair chance a neglected infill, even one neglected a decade will need some fitting work to be ideal - solid and use and perfectly even in adjustment).

 

[Cheshirechappie]

Is there a generally agreed definition of what constitutes an "infill plane"?

I have assumed that an infill is one where the blade is supported on a timber infill, as with Norris, Spears and, currently Konrad Sauer, whereas Mr. Holtey's recent designs are supported on a metal cross piece, and not strictly an infill, even if the plane has wooden handle construction, between metal side plates.

R.A.Salaman, in his 'Dictionary of Woodworking Tools', does not, as far as I can tell, use the term 'infill plane' at all. He does refer to 'metal mitre planes', 'metal panel and jointer planes' and 'metal smoothing planes of Spiers and Norris pattern'. Make of that what you will.

 

[Bedrock]

Thank you for your replies.
Simply, I had assumed that any sales description reference to an "infill" indicated that the blade is bedded on timber. Any reference to a Norris, immediately tells you what to expect, but there are niche makers who "infill" their metal sideplates with wood but bed the blade on a metal, as I think, do Quasheng in their recent mitre plane release.
Clearly not that simple.

 

[Boysie]

Even Norris had the blade bedded on steel in the No 50 at least.
Its been complicated for a long time.
http://www.norrisplanes.com/norris-numb ... ing-plane/

 

[D_W]

Indeed, they did. I have had two norris planes with boxes, and both just said "steel planes" on them.

In terms of stability, only the A5s that I've had were duds, but the cast plane with wood parts has probably got a better chance of being a good one 80 years after manufacture without any fettling.

(the A5s could be made to work, but their metal parts were way out of true - something very surprising, and they'd have been better planes without the adjuster).

 

[Bedrock]

Gentlemen

Thank you for your comments. I have duly learnt not to make general assumptions.

Mike

 

[Konrad Sauer]

in my mind, an infill plane is a metal shell filled in (or 'in filled') with wood where the wood is in contact with the sides and sole of the plane. A Stanley type plane, where the handle and front knob only contact the sole are not infills - as they are not 'filled in'.

 

[Bedrock]

Konrad

Thank you for your input. There are a number of makers who "infill" within a metal shell, but provide a metal bar or crosspiece on which to bed the blade. Would that still sit with your definition?
I suspect that there are some strong views as to whether a wood or metal bed makes a difference, but I did not want to get into that discussion.
Mike

 

[Konrad Sauer]

I think so - assuming you are meaning Karl and Ron (Brese). I am sure there are others too. I have never considered the material the blade beds on to be a defining characteristic of an infill... but I am by no means an infill history expert or even purist I suppose... messing around with stabilized and dyed wood removes me from that camp I think.